• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Extinction Rebellion transport disruption from 17/04/2019

Status
Not open for further replies.

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,916
Location
Nottingham
Not really unpredicted really though as the are all things that should have been well aware of during the design process, and of course Chernobyl was more a case of shut up and do as your told.
Most people are more worried by a rare but serious even than by a less serious but much more common one. For example, far more people are likely to be killed in the mining for a coal-fired power station than the average of nuclear fatalities per nuclear power station (not to mention the effects of pollution), but most people still see nuclear power as more dangerous.

With hindsight all the nuclear accidents could have been prevented if things had been done differently, but that's probably true of all accidents. In the case of nuclear accidents the worst case consequences are so severe that people are unconfortable with it, and probably can't help wondering if there may be other accident scenarios that haven't been foreseen either. The 737 MAX shows that this can happen even today in a relatively mature technology such as aviation, which has improved its general levels of safety significantly in the last few decades. There is also the concern about keeping nuclear waste away from people for several milennia to reduce its radioactivity to a safe level.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,529
Re nuclear waste...
Can’t we bury it in the middle of a desert somewhere a long long way from habitation?
Third world country makes a stack of cash from a useless bit of territory, probably some infrastructure too, and it’s all concreted in so no one is getting too it?
 

Mutant Lemming

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2011
Messages
3,194
Location
London
Re nuclear waste...
Can’t we bury it in the middle of a desert somewhere a long long way from habitation?
Third world country makes a stack of cash from a useless bit of territory, probably some infrastructure too, and it’s all concreted in so no one is getting too it?

Imagine how filled with awe were those who re-discovered the tombs of the ancient pharaohs. Digging through the sands to find pyramids that had been sealed for 2000 years... looking on in amazement at the relics of a lost civilisation. Fast forward 2000 years from now as archaeologists of future generations dig through massive layers of concrete anticipating such construction had been made to conceal vast wealth or the tombs of important rulers as they ponder the significance of the symbols and BNFL lettering.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,223
Location
No longer here
No need. Stopping having children would be sufficient. It is easier to have fewer children anyway. Other environmental activities require significant sacrifice, such as giving up the car or not flying.

Stopping people retiring very early would likewise be prudent.
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
Stopping people retiring very early would likewise be prudent.

Why? There are strong links between the FIRE (Financial Independent and Early Retirement) and environmentalism movements. Some people choose a FIRE lifestyle to minimise their impact on the environment. Reduced expenditure leads to reduced consumption, and therefore reduced pollution and environmental damage.

The trailblazer for the FIRE movement (Jacob Fisker) said his initial motivation for extreme early retirement was when he became environmentally aware. He previously had a particular weakness for electronic gadgets.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
The use of water-cannon vehicles would have been one way of disrupting those causing disruption and at the same time providing relief against the oppressive heat that has afflicted the capital over the last few days.

Not sure how well water-canoning Canary Wharf DLR station would've worked...
 

Darandio

Established Member
Joined
24 Feb 2007
Messages
10,678
Location
Redcar
The use of water-cannon vehicles would have been one way of disrupting those causing disruption and at the same time providing relief against the oppressive heat that has afflicted the capital over the last few days.

Opressive heat? o_O It's been a bit mild.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
The use of water-cannon vehicles would have been one way of disrupting those causing disruption and at the same time providing relief against the oppressive heat that has afflicted the capital over the last few days.

I assumed that you would have realised it was those causing the disruption in the highways of the capital to whom I alluded, not any DLR station...:rolleyes:

Well, at Oxford Circus you'd have ended up with a very flooded tube station!
 

LOL The Irony

On Moderation
Joined
29 Jul 2017
Messages
5,335
Location
Chinatown, New York
Every nuclear disaster just listed prooves why we shouldn't use nuclear energy. It's fine* until everything goes t*ts up and then babies are born with deformities and the plant workers & first responders suffer acute radiation poisioning and die a slow, painful death.

*It really isn't fine though. Anything that requires being stored in lead & concrete bunkers deep underground for hundereds of thousands of years isn't clean energy.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,223
Location
No longer here
Why? There are strong links between the FIRE (Financial Independent and Early Retirement) and environmentalism movements. Some people choose a FIRE lifestyle to minimise their impact on the environment. Reduced expenditure leads to reduced consumption, and therefore reduced pollution and environmental damage.

The trailblazer for the FIRE movement (Jacob Fisker) said his initial motivation for extreme early retirement was when he became environmentally aware. He previously had a particular weakness for electronic gadgets.

If people retire early en-masse, then more offspring are required to fund that, ether through benefits or being in work to contribute to private pension funds.
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
If people retire early en-masse, then more offspring are required to fund that, ether through benefits or being in work to contribute to private pension funds.

Given that early retirees are not big consumers, they do not sustain a lot of economic activity, so fewer jobs are needed. If early retirement became the norm, there would be a significant cut in GDP, but there would be also be a reduction in greenhouse gases. Mass early retirement may be economically sustainable because the cost of living would reduce, especially the cost of housing. But if early retirement could no longer be afforded because of too many people doing it, then some people would go back to work, so the issue really is moot.
 

Lucan

Established Member
Joined
21 Feb 2018
Messages
1,211
Location
Wales
Every nuclear disaster just listed prooves why we shouldn't use nuclear energy. It's fine* until everything goes t*ts up and then babies are born with deformities
The radiation levels released to the public by the accidents at Three Mile Island and Fukushima were trivial. It is ironic and sad that the death of nearly 20,000 people from the Fukushima tsunami itself received little attention in the West, which remains obsessed with the high radiation dose received by a few power station workers (but with no verifiable deaths resulting). I have worked at nuclear power stations myself and have received higher radiation doses than any Fukushima or TMI public, but my doses were still well within permitted levels; indeed within the dose normally received from natural radiation (including particularly from drinking coffee).

Chenobyl was a more spectacular and significant event caused by a very poor and old Russian design not used anywhere else in the world; its nuclear dynamics were basically unstable. Even so the effects of that accident have been wildly exagerated by anti-nuclear groups including the blatent faking of evidence to support their campaigns. Those scaremongering activities resulted in for example estimates of over 100,000 unnecessary abortions around the world.

Many deaths after these accidents resulted simply from the stress and anxiety induced by radiophobia, including the resulting actions by ignorant civic officials. Thousands of deaths were caused just by the evacuation of people from surrounding areas, in most cases unnecessary.

Perhaps you could point us to verifiable cases of babies being born with deformities due to these nuclear accidents. The World Health Organisation among others would certainly be interested as they are currently unaware of any.
 

Essan

Member
Joined
22 Feb 2017
Messages
526
Location
Evesham / Lochailort
Nuclear power is like air travel. Normally quite safe, but when an accident does happen, a lot of people are affected. Coal is by far the biggest killer, and with a massive environmental cost too. It's also carcinogenic.
 

Gooner18

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2018
Messages
539
Over a 1000 arrests , that’s a lot of people throwing away future job opportunities
 

Darandio

Established Member
Joined
24 Feb 2007
Messages
10,678
Location
Redcar
How many will be charged of that number?

Only 53 so far.

Besides, from the age demographic i've seen in the majority of coverage i've watched they are people that don't need to worry about future job opportunities anyway.
 

Gooner18

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2018
Messages
539
Last I heard, a few days ago, it was fewer than 50.

I wonder what these future job opportunities are though.

They would of all been bailed pending further investigation, I would expect within the next month the charge number to go up into the hundreds, leading to a criminal conviction which will affect their opportunities in certain jobs and Maybe getting into certain countries
 

Gooner18

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2018
Messages
539
Mind you I guess getting into different counties should not be a problem for them as they won’t be flying , going by ferry or using cars as these burn fossil fuels.
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,259
Location
West of Andover
Mind you I guess getting into different counties should not be a problem for them as they won’t be flying , going by ferry or using cars as these burn fossil fuels.

Other than the ones who need to have an 'emergency' holiday to warmer climates during the summer months :lol:

Although they could go on holiday to Eco-Land, a remote island off the coast of Scotland with no evil electricity other than what is generated by a little wind turbine
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,085
The use of water-cannon vehicles would have been one way of disrupting those causing disruption and at the same time providing relief against the oppressive heat that has afflicted the capital over the last few days.
I believe the ones Boris Johnson bought at some expense were sold for scrap, with only a fraction of their purchase price realised. Their use wouldn't have ended the protests but probably have exacerbated things.
 

dgl

Established Member
Joined
5 Oct 2014
Messages
2,412
And adding to the nuclear debate, if you want to see a good video on the Fukushima accident, but without any politics (just facts) then this video from the French nuclear safety authority is excellent.

 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
It does appear that a number of contributors to this thread espouse Puritanical values and have a somewhat Cromwellian lack of ability to enjoy life's pleasures.

Is happiness directly proportional to amount of money spent and carbon emissions produced?
 

reddragon

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
3,147
Location
Churn (closed)
Every nuclear disaster just listed prooves why we shouldn't use nuclear energy. It's fine* until everything goes t*ts up and then babies are born with deformities and the plant workers & first responders suffer acute radiation poisioning and die a slow, painful death.

*It really isn't fine though. Anything that requires being stored in lead & concrete bunkers deep underground for hundereds of thousands of years isn't clean energy.
True but nobody in the UK dies of radiation poisoning, whereas 69,000 a year die from air pollution of which 45,000 a year just from diesel vehicle pollution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top